real The Official December 2016 Waiters Group - Patience is a Virtue Forum

[Mikey]

Holy shit my last PT was not a fluke. I just took PT 46 this morning...
RC: -3
LR1: -1
LR2: -1
AR: -0 (Finished with 5:15) remaining

Score: 94/175

New best score too. I'm freakin out man. wtfffff

Beasttttt

[SunDevil14]

PS - Go to hell RC humanities passages.

-nuff said

[dj9i27]

/

[SunDevil14]

Speaking of RC, just sat down at the library and am going to drill some passages along with LR.

[Tazewell]

Just took PT 59 and the RC about the sculptor who used positive light absolutely destroyed me. Went -4. Worst I've ever done on a single passage. It had a very Eileen Gray feel to it, but harder IMO

[Barack O'Drama]

RC is the Linux of testing. there I said it

haha!

[Greenteachurro]

Just took PT 59 and the RC about the sculptor who used positive light absolutely destroyed me. Went -4. Worst I've ever done on a single passage. It had a very Eileen Gray feel to it, but harder IMO

NOGUCHHHIIIIiiiiiii. Yeah I agree anyone who had a tough time with Eileen should look at Noguchi.

[Greenteachurro]

RC is the Linux of testing. there I said it

Is that because most people hate it but there are a few people who completely fetishize RC?

[Instrumental]

RC is the Linux of testing. there I said it

Is that because most people hate it but there are a few people who completely fetishize RC?

Those sick bastards.

[Mikey]

Isn't there a type of reading comp on every standardized test? I wish reading was as straight forward on the LSAT as it is on the mcat. My aunts SO took the mcat and did very well on it and said that LSAT RC is different because shit is so subtle compared to the mcat where it's literally straight forward.

Tldr rc sux

[dj9i27]

.

[harveybirdman502]

RA is killing me. Unlike MBT/MSS, where I improved with drilling, there doesn't seem to be any particular pattern or strategy other than "Negate the answer and see if hurts the argument." That's legit the only advice people have given me.

Well, what if you don't know if it directly affects the conclusion or just a premise? Or does it hurt a premise enough to undo the entire argument? Then the strategy is absolutely useless. What a nightmare these are. I'd rather do an RC passage on the intricacies of genetic deficiencies. Sick over this.

Are these so difficult because the answer is virtually unpredictable on most? Some are easy but the majority are paralyzing for me.

[harveybirdman502]

RA is killing me. Unlike MBT/MSS, where I improved with drilling, there doesn't seem to be any particular pattern or strategy other than "Negate the answer and see if hurts the argument." That's legit the only advice people have given me.

Well, what if you don't know if it directly affects the conclusion or just a premise? Or does it hurt a premise enough to undo the entire argument? Then the strategy is absolutely useless. What a nightmare these are. I'd rather do an RC passage on the intricacies of genetic deficiencies. Sick over this.

Are these so difficult because the answer is virtually unpredictable on most? Some are easy but the majority are paralyzing for me.

Alright, so a lot of these seem to deal with cause and effect (Is this also the case w/ newer tests?). So one method is obviously to show that without the cause the effect doesn't occur and when the effect doesn't occur then the cause doesn't occur. Also, the alternate explanations seem to be good answer choices here.

The structure of the other non-causal questions are way more complicated though.

[dj9i27]

.

[dj9i27]

.

[harveybirdman502]

Me: Dear LSAC Gods,
Will I ever get a good score on this test and be happy in my life again?

LSAC Gods:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYU_eDMr4xE

Checking your posts, I see you got a 177 recently. You've nothing to worry about. Under real conditions you'll probably do better than expected. You don't seem to have any issues with completing sections, so maybe the 170 just had more of a specific question type or just harder questions overall.

Sometimes LR be that way.

[harveybirdman502]

RA is killing me. Unlike MBT/MSS, where I improved with drilling, there doesn't seem to be any particular pattern or strategy other than "Negate the answer and see if hurts the argument." That's legit the only advice people have given me.

Well, what if you don't know if it directly affects the conclusion or just a premise? Or does it hurt a premise enough to undo the entire argument? Then the strategy is absolutely useless. What a nightmare these are. I'd rather do an RC passage on the intricacies of genetic deficiencies. Sick over this.

Are these so difficult because the answer is virtually unpredictable on most? Some are easy but the majority are paralyzing for me.

Required Assumption right (I just cluster all assumptions together so idk)
I like the bridge the gap approach, like A----C find B and it is the answer, that is a super simple skeleton of my thought process if I got the nature of the question right right.

Same w/ clustering. SA just have more conditional logic it seems. That technique is pretty useful if you know your flaws, but the wording can be so dense that it makes it difficult to find the leap on some (scientific studies especially). Sometimes it's even difficult to just choose if you should even think of a question in terms of conditional logic.

Writing this out here actually makes me more aware of my specific shortcomings weirdly.

[dj9i27]

.

[Mikey]

LG: -1

WHAT A DAMN SHAME, SMFH

lol jk. 170 is boss though, wish i could do that. good shit

[dj9i27]

.

[Mikey]

LG: -1

WHAT A DAMN SHAME, SMFH

lol jk. 170 is boss though, wish i could do that. good shit

I rolfmaod at that lol, I'd walk with a 170 100% and be extremely happy; but all things considered on test day things aren't going to be ideal (like you can try to channel what you'd be feeling during a PT but it will be different on test day) so I like to be PTing well above what I'd be happy with you know.

And sir, didn't you go -0 on LG not too long ago?

yeah i get you, that's why i'm not sitting in december anymore.

yeah i go -0 on LG frequently, but went -1 on PT52 LG yesterday. pls dont shame me.

[dj9i27]

.

[Mikey]

LG: -1

WHAT A DAMN SHAME, SMFH

lol jk. 170 is boss though, wish i could do that. good shit

I rolfmaod at that lol, I'd walk with a 170 100% and be extremely happy; but all things considered on test day things aren't going to be ideal (like you can try to channel what you'd be feeling during a PT but it will be different on test day) so I like to be PTing well above what I'd be happy with you know.

And sir, didn't you go -0 on LG not too long ago?

yeah i get you, that's why i'm not sitting in december anymore.

yeah i go -0 on LG frequently, but went -1 on PT52 LG yesterday. pls dont shame me.

Respect for making the decision to wait a little longer, you'll be a 'TestMaster' when the day comes (horrid pun).

Also lol, I can never shame anyone after my performance in September, I don't think I got any question on viruses right lol

i got 1 question right on viruses LOL. i mean, i did guess on it all so whatevs, i aced the other 2 games and got a -1 on g3

[dj9i27]

.

[Mikey]

I felt like such shit during the virus game I just gave up mentally, Game 3 murdered me as well but when I read over it Grey Day I was kicking myself because I love those types of games. I learned a lot from September (mainly kick everyone who is sick around me) mostly it showed my mental weakness that hopefully I have conquered. It'll show in the next 2.5 weeks.

Also we need a new poll soon, and who here is in charge of the inevitable waiters thread.

honestly, from what i remember, i didn't write out my rules for g3 like i usually do for those games. like, i did something weird af for that game, and i think that's why i let that game suck all of my time.